Chapter 18. — Harmony of the Dispensations — General Consistency of the Bible — Its Analogy With Nature.

BOOK 3.—DIRECT EVIDENCE—INTERNAL.

CHAPTER 18. — HARMONY OF THE DISPENSATIONS —

GENERAL CONSISTENCY OF THE BIBLE — ITS

ANALOGY WITH NATURE.

UNDER the division of Internal Evidences of Christianity, according to our definitions, we include “all that evidence which is derived from the nature of the doctrines, the consistency and character of the writers, and the effects of Christianity. Or more at large — under this division, we embrace the evidence derived from the consistency of the different parts of the Bible, the excellency of its doctrines; their accordance with human nature, their transforming influence upon the heart and life; and the internal assurance of their truth, which they, through the Spirit, impart to all who believe and obey them.”

In strictness of speech, none of the evidences of Christianity are either wholly external or wholly internal; for whether we speak of miracles which are always classed with the external evidences, or of doctrines which are always considered internal evidences, we are compelled to bring the materials of our argument partly from within and partly from without the Scriptures. Thus we find the miracles recorded within the Bible, and the evidence substantiating them, is derived partly from the Bible and partly from other sources; but as miracles do not properly enter into the subject-matter of the revelation, but merely serve as outside testimony, confirming what is revealed, they are considered external evidences; and although we find the doctrines of revelation recorded in the Scriptures, yet, to exhibit our argument deduced from them, we are compelled to appeal to various facts and data, derived from consciousness, experience, observation, and various other ex-scriptural sources; but as the argument is grounded upon the doctrines revealed in the Scriptures, this argument is considered internal.

The standard Christian authors differ greatly as to the relative importance of the external and internal evidences of Christianity. Dr. S. Clarke, Erskine, Soame Jenyns, and others, give to the internal evidences the first importance, and would make the external evidence stand in abeyance till the internal has been examined, and has cleared the way for the external. Other authors of equal eminence and ability place the external evidence foremost, both in order and importance. In this class of writers we find Chapman, Richard Watson, Alexander, and many others. On this question, Chapman speaks as follows:

“Were a teacher sent from heaven, with signs and wonders, to a nation of idolaters, and they previously instructed to regard no miracles of his whatsoever, till they were fully satisfied of the goodness of his doctrines, it is easy to foresee by what rule they would prove his doctrine, and what success he would meet with amongst them. Add to this, what is likewise exceedingly material, the great delays and perplexities attending this way of proceeding. For if every article of doctrine must be discussed and scanned by every person to whom it is offered, what slow advances would be made by a divine revelation among such a people! Hundreds would probably be cut off before they came to the end of their queries, and the prophet might grow decrepit with age before he gained twenty proselytes in a nation.”

Dr. Chalmers seems evidently to have changed his ground upon this question. At one time he spoke of the internal evidence as “not capable of being so treated as to produce conviction in the minds of philosophical infidels, and as opening a door to their most specious objections to Christianity.”

At a subsequent period, this same able author, writing on this subject, after having admitted that he had experienced a modification of his former views, expresses himself thus: “Instead of holding all religion as suspended on the miraculous evidence, we see this evidence itself standing at the bar of an anterior principle, and there waiting for its authentication, There is a previous natural religion on whose aid we call for a determination of this matter.”

It is a little strange that a mind so well stored and capacious should be found, in the brief space of a few years, occupying opposing extreme positions on this question — first deeming the internal evidence as satisfactory, and its employment, at least, of questionable propriety; and next exalting it to a position anterior and superior to that of the external evidence — but it is often true that the most noble and lofty geniuses, impelled by their native extraordinary momentum, fail to poise upon the golden medium-point of sober truth. We consider both external and internal evidence important and satisfactory, each in its respective sphere. The external evidence is the pioneer, clearing the way and leading the inquirer to the contemplation of the strong foundations of the Christian edifice, or it constitutes the outward “towers and bulwarks” of its defense; the internal evidence is the settled occupant of the structure, who conducts us to the interior halls and magnificent apartments, or it answers to the connecting timbers and cementing walls, holding together as one grand united building all the essential parts, exhibiting the inner strength, utility, and beauty, and binding the whole with immovable stability upon its solid foundations, within its impregnable bulwarks. In the primal authentication of Christianity, the external evidence was essential, to arrest the attention and carry instant conviction to the minds of both the philosophical skeptics and the common people, and it is still essential to command the homage and convince the judgment of the learned, as well as to confirm the faith of all; but the internal evidence, while it is less adapted to the awakening of the attention and to the convincing of the more philosophical and skeptical, gains a more direct and easy access to the conscience and heart of the uneducated masses, exercising over them a more general and powerful influence. Indeed, this evidence, when brought to its consummation in the matured experience of the enlightened Christian, though he may not be able to present it so forcibly to the conviction of others, yet to his own mind it furnishes the highest and most convincing order of testimony in favor of the truth and reality of religion, for it is the direct inspoken witness of God to the soul. Hence we conclude that, while both external and internal evidence are important, each in its peculiar sphere, they both are alike deserving of our careful consideration; and we should not concern ourselves as to which shall be assigned the superiority.

The internal evidence of Christianity opens for exploration a field of almost boundless extent. It presents to our view the entire volume of revelation, scarce a single paragraph of which can be selected that does not furnish evidence more or less direct of the divinity of its origin. And this class of evidence is scarcely less limited in diversity than in extent. Whatever is found within the lids of the Bible bearing the impress of God, whether it relates to the harmony and consistency of its parts, the character and importance of its facts, the excellency and sublimity of its doctrines, the reasonableness and purity of its precepts or the style and honesty of its writers, furnishes ground for an argument under the head of internal evidence of Christianity.

Over an area so vast and varied, it is not to be expected or required that any two authors should travel in precisely the same path. While some will be impressed with one particular class of these evidences, others will be more attracted by the beauty and force of another class; and thus each separate author, following the bent of his own mind, will bring forward something hitherto unnoticed to swell the amount of this ever-accumulating store of internal evidence.

I. The first particular ground of argument in this department to which we invite attention is, the mutual connection and dependency binding together as one united whole the Old and the New Testaments and the Mosaic and the Christian dispensations.

We think it a position almost incontrovertible, that the two Testaments and two dispensations stand or fall together. They hang in connection as essential kindred parts of an indivisible whole, and, as one has said, “like the two cherubs, look steadfastly toward each other, and toward the mercy-seat which they encompass.” As the wonderful adaptation of the different parts to each other pervading the works of nature so attests the skill and wisdom of their Author as to demonstrate his unity and divinity, even so the harmony pervading the parts of the two Testaments and two dispensations, and the perfect adaptation of the parts of the one to those of the other, exhibit the clearest evidence that the same Being is the Author of both, and that he must be possessed of the attributes of divinity. The glove is not more evidently adapted to the hand, nor the eye to the rays of the light, nor the veins and arteries to the conveyance of the blood, nor the lungs to the process of breathing, than are the teachings of the New Testament and the different parts of the gospel of Christ to those of the Old Testament and the Mosaic law. We view it as indubitable, that no unbiased, intelligent person, can carefully peruse the Old and the New Testaments, and not rise up from that perusal thoroughly convinced that both are true, or both are false.

Having established, in former chapters, the genuineness and authenticity of these Scriptures, we will not here repeat the arguments there set forth, but proceed upon the admission that the facts of the Bible are faithfully given as they transpired. What, then, we ask, can be plainer than that the two Testaments and the two dispensations mutually prove each other? The testimony of Christ to the truth and authority of the Old Testament is direct and unequivocal. His language is: “Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me.” John 5:39. “Did ye never read in the Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner.” Matthew 21:42. “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.” Matthew 22:29. “Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures.” Luke 24:45.

In these passages our Saviour gives his most unqualified testimony to the divine authority of the Scriptures of the Old Testament; hence, if the divinity of his mission and of the New Testament be admitted, that of the Old Testament necessarily follows.

Equally conclusive is his testimony to the divine legation of Moses: “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.” John 5:46. “And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me.” Luke 24:44. Again, it is written: “Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Luke 24:25-27. “And they said one to another, Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures.” Luke 24:32. To Peter, in the garden of Gethsemane, he said: “Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?” Matthew 26:53, 54. In his dispute with the Jews, the Saviour spoke as follows: “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,” etc. John 10:34, 35.

With this testimony of the Saviour that of his apostles perfectly corresponds. They are constantly quoting the Scriptures of the Old Testament, always referring to them as the infallible word of God. Paul to Timothy uses the following language: “From a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” 2 Timothy 3:15, 16. Peter speaks of the writings of St. Paul, connecting them with the Scriptures of the Old Testament, thus: “Which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” 2 Peter 3:16. Again, the same apostle declares: “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:21. The same apostle again says: “Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.” 1 Peter 1:10, 11. In the Epistle to the Hebrews are recorded these words: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.”

From all these scriptures it is manifest that Christ and his apostles, in the most direct and emphatic manner, recognized as of divine authority the Old Testament Scriptures and the legation of Moses. Hence it is here fully proved, that if the New Testament is the word of God, so is the Old; and if the mission of Christ was divine, so was that of Moses.

The next point is, to show in what manner the Old Testament sanctions and receives its fulfillment in the New. The entire Mosaic economy was evidently designed as a temporary institution. Moses himself, and all the Jewish prophets after him, spoke of a “Prophet whom God should raise up, like unto Moses” — of a Deliverer, Shiloh, Messiah, or King, who was to sit on the throne of David, and reign prosperously over both Jews and Gentiles. Pointing to this Ruler and his kingdom were innumerable types, ceremonials, and services, which, considered in themselves alone, were unmeaning, useless, and burdensome, but, viewed as receiving their fulfillment in Christ, were remarkably significant, sublimely illustrative of a most beneficent and enduring institution, and graciously communicative of richest blessings.

This Mosaic economy was a complete and homogeneous system, the various parts of which had a manifest connection with and dependence upon each other. It was no senseless aggregation of disjointed and incongruous elements — of rites and ceremonies, of altars and sacrifices, of priests and services, of laws and formulas — without affinity or mutual assimilation, but every thing bore the signature of being part and parcel of the same great connected whole. Could a system thus harmoniously arranged and symmetrically connected, and, moreover, so typically adumbrative of a new dispensation by which, after a lapse of centuries, it was to be superseded, be a fictitious, human contrivance? How can we account for the origin of the sacrificial institution, and the constant and appropriate reference thereby kept up and running through the entire Mosaic economy to the sinful character of man, and the great doctrine of vicarious atonement, and especially for the complete conformity of the whole to the gospel plan of redemption by the death of Christ, except upon the supposition that God was the author of both systems? Could human skill and foresight have devised such an extended system of types and shadows extending throughout centuries, and brought about so exact and marvelous a fulfillment in every particular? The supposition is utterly incredible! The Mosaic institution, considered in itself — in the wisdom of its precepts, the sublimity of its doctrines, the simplicity, purity, and grandeur of its ritual, and its harmonious consistency throughout — so far transcends all pagan religions and the proudest efforts of human genius in all ages, as to impress every impartial examiner with the fact, that it was not “of men,” but “from heaven.” But when we look at its exact and wonderful fulfillment in the gospel, the evidence of its divine origin is overwhelming!

If the typical and ceremonial institution of Moses was the invention of men, it was an exhibition of madness and folly, combined with system and skill, perfectly irreconcilable with each other — of madness and folly, that a religious ceremonial so expensive and onerous should be voluntarily assumed or imposed upon any people, for no assignable reason whatever; of system and skill, that an institution so extensive and varied in its range and application should yet be so harmoniously cemented as one connected system, and so perfectly fitted in type and shadow to “better things to come.” The only rational conclusion on the subject is, that God was the author of both the law and the gospel, and that the one was the substance of which the other was the shadow.

In all the numerous types and shadows connected with the Old Dispensation, and pointing to the “good things to come,” there is not one that does not find its antitype, substance, or accomplishment, in the gospel of Jesus. we look upon the paschal lamb, whose blood availed to the deliverance of the Israelites from the destroying angel, and we think of “the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world.” We look upon the brazen serpent lifted up in the wilderness by the hand of Moses for the healing of the bitten Israelites, and we think of the Son of God hanging on the cross, that all the world may look to him and live. We read of the Jewish temple, with its outer and inner courts, its altars and its sacrifices, with its “golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid roundabout with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant, and over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy seat” — we look upon the priests, with their vestments, their robes, and their incense — in a word, we look upon all the services of that extended ritual, and we ask for the explanation of the whole system; but this explanation is to be found in the gospel of Christ, and nowhere else. Can it be that this wonderful harmony and mutual adaptation to each other of these two systems is the result of mere chance? Has it been produced by human contrivance? The supposition involves a moral impossibility. Between the two Testaments and the two dispensations there is an all-pervading and ever-present unity of design, extending through all the centuries of their history, impressing upon both the same signature, and assigning to each the same divine origin. II. We look next at the perfect consistency of all the parts of the Bible with each other, as an evidence of the divinity of its origin. This volume is not the production of one individual author, nor of one particular age of the world; but it was written by as many as thirty or forty different authors, living in distant periods of time, extending through a space of sixteen hundred years. That so many writers thus distantly severed from each other, precluding the possibility of consultation or collusion, should write even a small treatise upon any one subject, and yet preserve a perfect consistency in all their statements and views, would be a phenomenon in itself truly marvelous, and such as has never been exhibited in all the human productions of the world. But how must this marvel be increased in reference to the Bible, when we reflect on the extent of the volume, the wide range and great diversity of subjects embraced, the variety exhibited by these authors — in character, in education, in customs, in country, in taste, in talent, in pursuit, and in condition in life!

In this volume is embraced, with a greater or less degree of prominence, a vast range of topics — history, biography, agriculture, manufactures, government, politics, trade, commerce, architecture, navigation, letters, music, poetry, travels, geography, philosophy, morals, religion. These topics are all either particularly treated of in the Bible, or incidentally alluded to, with more or less distinctness.

We find, also, great diversity in the character and circumstances of the sacred writers. They were taken from nearly all the walks of life, from the highest to the lowest. Kings, priests, prophets, statesmen, judges, physicians, shepherds, husbandmen, herdsmen, mechanics, fishermen, and gatherers of sycamore-fruit — some from all these departments have contributed, each his portion, to the composition of the Bible. When, therefore, we look at the wide range and great diversity of subjects embraced, and the number and variety of character, pursuit, taste, and condition of the writers — when we take all these facts into the account, we demand if the perfect agreement and consistency so manifestly preserved throughout the volume, is not satisfactory evidence that it is the product of no merely human effort?

Human productions, on whatever subject, are ever changing and passing away. One authority rises and flourishes to-day; to-morrow it is superseded by another, and sinks into oblivion. The text-books of one age are not those of the next. In the progress of knowledge, it has been discovered that they contain important errors; hence they are thrown aside and more approved standards are adopted, only, in their turn, to share a similar fate. No two merely human authors, unless they were mere copyists, have ever written books upon the same subject without contradicting each other, and few have written much without contradicting themselves. What two authors on grammar, geography, rhetoric, mathematics, history of the same country and period, agriculture, politics, ethics, or religion, have not disagreed — and most of them, again and again, come in direct conflict with each other? We may challenge the infidel world to name them. Indeed, unless, as already stated, they be mere copyists, or be in collusion, such an occurrence is, in the nature of things, impossible. But within the lids of the Bible. though infidelity has exerted her utmost ingenuity and strength for thousands of years, she has never been able to identify the first real contradiction! Objections without reason, and cavils without sense, she has brought forth by the legion. She has even shouted over a seeming contradiction, as though she had discovered a panacea for “all the ills that flesh is heir to;” but this exultation has ever been shown to have been premature. A few beams of sound criticism have soon dispelled the clouds of ignorance on which the supposed contradiction was dependent for its existence; and clearly demonstrated that the contradiction existed in the ignorance of man, and not in the word of God!

In all the references to history, whether of the Jews or of pagan nations; in all the numerous statements bearing upon the geography of countries, or the manners and customs of nations; in all the reference to the political status of empires, kingdoms, and provinces; in all the incidental allusions to agriculture, science, philosophy, or the arts; in all the representations of the character, morals, and religion of numerous nations in different ages in every and all of these things, as embraced in the Bible, that wonderful volume stands forth unimpeachable, defying an infidel world to convict its pages of the first real contradiction or error! Can such a book be of human origin? Is it a property of human productions to be thus perfect? Let honest reason decide the question.

III. Another ground of argument on this subject is, the consistency of the administration of God, as revealed in the Scriptures, with what we learn of his ways, as exhibited in his works.

Nothing is more common with infidels, than to aver that the administration of God, as revealed in the Bible, is inconsistent with what we learn of him from his works around us. Thus they endeavor to set the God of nature and the God of revelation at variance; and assuming (which none can dispute) that nature must be true, they proceed to infer that revelation must be false. Christianity, on the other hand, strenuously contends that such is the perfect harmony and consistency of the ways of God, as revealed in the Bible, with what we know of his administration, as seen in the works of nature and of providence, that it follows, as a necessary inference, that the God of nature and of providence must also be the God of revelation. For the illustration of the Christian argument derived from this source, we will select only a few of the obvious points of analogy between nature and revelation; but they shall be those points which infidelity has seemed most delighted to use in her favor.

First, the principle of progression developed in divine revelation has been made a ground of complaint by the infidel. Why is it, we are asked, that, if the Bible be of God, a complete revelation of Christianity, the perfected dispensation of religion was not given to the world at once, and not the circuitous route adopted of keeping mankind for four thousand years under the comparative darkness and bondage of the patriarchal and Mosaic dispensations? And why is it, that when God constitutes a person a Christian, he must be first a babe and then a young man ere he can attain to maturity in Christian character? Is this consistent, it is urged, with the character we learn of God from his works? If God is infinite in goodness and power, can he adopt unnecessary delay in bestowing upon his creatures the blessings he sees they so much need?

In reply to these objections, we confidently appeal to the analogy between nature and revelation. We think this will not only be sufficient to silence the cavil of the skeptic, but that it will furnish a very powerful internal evidence of the truth of revelation.

We ask, then, Is not this same principle of progression abundantly exemplified in nature? We see it in vegetation: There is “first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear.” We see it in our own species: We pass through the several stages of infancy, childhood, and youth, up to manhood and old age. We witness it in all educational developments: The child just inducted into school does not enter at once upon the study of the higher branches, but he begins with the alphabet, and gradually advances from one stage to the next in the ascending scale. Now, the infidel will not deny that God, had he seen proper so to order it, could just as easily have dispensed with this progressive order in nature. But such was not his plan. God formed the laws of nature after the counsel of infinite wisdom. Had he spoken the word he could with equal facility have so ordered it that the seed sown by the husbandman should mature into a ripe crop in a few hours, so that he might sow in the morning and reap in the afternoon of the same day. Let the skeptic first go and settle his quarrel with the God of nature, and then his cavils at revelation will be less inconsistent! This progressive principle in revelation only shows that the God of nature and the God of the Bible work by the same rule; in other words, it evinces that revelation is confirmed by nature. When the world was in its infancy, God imparted to it, in the patriarchal dispensation, the alphabet of religion. When that was sufficiently matured, the Mosaic economy was unfolded; and when “the fulness of time was come,” and all things in the best possible state of preparation for it, the full development of the gospel was made. In this succession of dispensations, and in their harmonious adaptation to each other, and to the condition of the world, there is a manifestation of wisdom and foresight transcending the utmost powers of mere humanity, and demonstrating the divine origin of the whole scheme.

Between the great foundation principles of nature and revelation, there is manifest a perfect analogy and harmony, from which may be deduced a very forcible argument in favor of the truth of revelation. The points of the analogy in question are very numerous, and have furnished material for that inimitable volume, Butler’s Analogy. But we propose to call attention only to one or two leading positions:

1. First, in both nature and revelation, the great foundation principles are too profoundly mysterious for the comprehension of human wisdom. The mysteries of revelation have a thousand times been paraded, magnified, and ridiculed by skeptics. And although it has been as often shown that similar objections might with equal propriety be urged against nature, yet infidelity seems determined never to remember the fact. The mysteries of the Bible have furnished the theme for many a sneering sarcasm; and perhaps will still continue to do so, so long as ridicule, instead of reason, shall continue to be the favorite weapon of infidelity. But we proceed to the consideration of the basis of our argument as stated above.

We first call attention to some of the leading foundation principles connected with revelation, and will show that they are profoundly mysterious, and, to finite minds, truly incomprehensible. In turning our attention to the great subject-matter of revelation, the first leading important doctrine resenting itself to our view, and challenging our faith, is the being and perfections of God. Here, at the very threshold of the great temple of revealed truth, we are called to the contemplation of a theme which is probably as overwhelmingly mysterious to angelic as it certainly is to human intellects. For what finite mind can comprehend the infinite God? Our utmost capacity can only grasp with a feeble hand something of what he has been pleased to reveal concerning his attributes; but of the essential nature of that high and lofty One, we can know nothing. His essence is deeply enshrined in mystery, beyond the reach of finite minds. Another great foundation-truth of revelation is the divinity of Christ. No doctrine of the Bible is more clearly revealed, or occupies a more important position in the system of divinity, than this. That Christ is God and that he is man, the Bible declares most explicitly; and our faith must bow submissively, and embrace the revealed fact. But what mind can comprehend this stupendous mystery? The atonement, the influence of the Spirit, the regeneration and sanctification of the soul — all these are also great essential doctrines of revelation; yet in each one of them, what a world of impenetrable mystery is embraced! The fact, then, is freely admitted, that revelation contains profound and inexplicable mysteries. It is quite probable that, pertaining to the glorious doctrines revealed in the Bible, there are depths, and heights, and lengths, and breadths of sublime mysteries never yet explored by men or angels. And while the endless cycles of eternity shall endure, these may furnish richest themes of contemplation for the multitudes who stand before the throne. But for these mysteries of revelation, one of the important evidences that God is its author would be lacking — for surely a revelation which finite minds can thoroughly comprehend would be destitute of one important mark of its having emanated from the great and incomprehensible One.

But when we turn our thoughts to the great foundation principles in connection with the science of nature, we find a most striking analogy to the mysteries of revelation. To maintain consistency with himself, the infidel should reject and refuse to believe in nature, until he can penetrate the profoundest depths of all her wonderful mysteries. But will he do so? What can he thoroughly comprehend of the essence of all material things? He cannot master the essence of an atom in matter, and yet he would spurn revelation from his faith on account of her mysteries.

To begin at the foundation principles in nature, what can the wisest philosopher tell us of the essence of matter? can he thoroughly analyze and define it? He may lecture upon its properties, but he can no more comprehend its essence than he can create a world.

Again, look at the great principle in nature called attraction, or the law of gravitation. What is it? Who can comprehend or define it? We witness the constant evidence of the fact. We see the sun from his throne, in the center of his system, as philosophy and astronomy tell us, grasping the planets with his golden chain of attraction, and whirling them in their orbits with such marvelous exactitude that they shall not deviate from their prescribed pathway the breadth of a hair in a million of ages. But we pause and inquire, What is this attraction? Can philosophy answer? Can the wisdom of the schools solve the problem? All they can tell us is, that it is a power, an influence, a something, they know not what; and, for want of a better name, they call it attraction. But to comprehend what this attraction is, is beyond the capacity of Sir Isaac Newton and all his disciples. They are as ignorant on this point as the most unlettered peasant. They know it is the power of Him who placed the sun in the firmament, and hung the earth upon nothing, but proud reason can go no farther. Here then is mystery in nature, profound and overwhelming. Let boasting infidelity explain this stupendous mystery in nature — till then, let her not scoff at the mysteries of revelation.

Another great foundation-stone in the temple of nature is the principle of life. The fact that this principle exists is obvious to our senses. We are familiar with its phenomena in both the vegetable and animal kingdoms. The germinating seed, the growing grass, the bursting bud, and the unfolding leaf, no less than the blush of health in the face and the power of action in the body of man, testify to the fact that the principle of life exists. But what is it? Who can penetrate its essence? Physiology may discourse of the germinating principle in vegetation, of the warming sun and the refreshing rain, and of the fructifying properties of soils; but what are they without the living principle in the seed? And this living principle none can analyze, define, or comprehend. And who has ever explained the principle of life in man? There is something within us that opens the senses to the wonders of the world about us, that paints the cheek and kindles the eye, that touches the muscle and moves the limb; but what is that something? The profoundest philosopher is as ignorant as the child. We may read that “God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul,” but we can go no farther. Beyond this Bible revealment natural science is dumb. The essence of life is still an inscrutable mystery. Look also at the mystery connected with the circulation of the blood. Since its discovery by Mr. Harvey, the fact has been obvious to all. But although we have had many learned lectures on the subject, this mystery in nature has never been explained. We have been told that it is the contraction and dilatation of the heart which propels the blood in one continuous current through the arteries to all parts of the body, whence it is taken up by the absorbents, and returned through the veins to the heart. But still the mystery in the process is unexplained. What causes the heart to contract and dilate? Here, at the very commencement, all the skill of philosophy is baffled — for the contraction and dilatation of the heart, on mere natural principles, must ever remain an inexplicable mystery. It is the power of God that, sitting at the seat of life, prevents the golden bowl from being broken, or the pitcher from being broken at the fountain. But how this is effected no one can tell. The fact is plain, the manner of the fact involves the mystery. Volumes might be written in pointing out the great mysteries of nature, at none of which does the faith of the infidel ever stagger, but at Bible mysteries he is ever ready to scoff. But that the mysteries in Scripture are so frequently urged by skeptics as objections to Christianity, we would have said less than we have upon the subject. We, however, present one farther example of the mysteries of nature. We refer to the wonders of instinct as seen in the department of irrational creation. Not to speak of the elephant, the dog, the fox, and others of the class, we notice this marvelous power in that small but useful insect, the honey-bee. With a skill surpassing that of all the chemists in the world, it collects its luscious store from every appropriate flower of the fields and the woods; and with a mathematical exactitude and mechanical ingenuity which no human ability can equal, it collects its materials and constructs its cells. Now, we ask, who can explain this phenomenon? This little chemist and mechanist never studied science, never was at school; and yet, by mere instinct, it exhibits a skill and ingenuity not susceptible of improvement. And, to add to the marvel, this wonderful little chemist and mechanist has made no advancement through the lapse of centuries; but, precisely as we witness now, it collected its sweets and constructed its store-houses amid the bowers of Eden. Is not this a mystery in nature? Thus we see that in both nature and revelation the great foundation principles embody incomprehensible mysteries, exhibiting in this the most perfect analogy. From this fact, the necessary conclusion should be that, if we embrace in our faith, without reserve, the entire system of nature, notwithstanding the mysteries it involves, we cannot without manifest inconsistency reject from our faith the system of revelation, because of the mysteries it may embrace. In reference to both systems, the mysteries lie not in the facts but in the manner of the facts. We may believe the facts though the manner of those facts be beyond our comprehension. Had revelation come to us free from all mystery, the same captious infidelity that now sneers at the sublime mysteries of the Bible would, doubtless, still deride and reject Christianity on the ground that it was destitute of sublime mysteries such as are recorded in the volume of nature. But the Christian philosopher, as he peruses these two great volumes, and marks the striking analogy between them, seeing upon both the same signature, may exult in the evidence thus derived that the same God who made the world is the author of his Bible.

2. In both nature and revelation, though we find much that is mysterious, yet we need not be experimentally or practically much the losers on that account — for those mysteries do not pertain to such things as are essential to our happiness either here or hereafter. They are what may be studied or let alone, as we choose, without any serious detriment.

It is a very impressive point of analogy between the two systems, and strongly demonstrative of the truth of revelation, that, both in reference to the temporal things of this life and the spiritual things of the next, both in nature and revelation, all that is most valuable or essential to our welfare is easy to be understood, and is readily accessible to all classes. A few illustrations will render this point of analogy clear and evident. First, look at the temporal blessings of life connected with nature. What is more essential to the welfare of all sentient living things than the surrounding atmosphere? Without it, man would immediately perish from the earth; without it, beast and bird, and tree and plant, would droop and die. Yet, in this department, how abundant the provisions of a merciful Providence! The globe is encircled, forty miles high, with a volume of this life-preserving fluid.

How essential to our welfare is the great staple article of water, and how abundant the supply! The oceans, the rivers, the creeks, the little branches, the springs, and even the floating clouds, are all employed as ministering servants to furnish and convey to man, and beast, and bird, and tree, and shrub, and plant, and to all that has life, an abundant supply of this invaluable commodity.

But if we look at revelation we find its pages stamped with this same impressive evidence of having proceeded from God. What are the mysterious matters and things “hard to be understood” in the Bible? Are they the great doctrines and precepts connected directly with the salvation of the soul? These are all so plain that “the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein.” In order to our salvation, we need not puzzle over the import of mysterious and yet unfulfilled prophecies, or the abstruse and knotty questions in theology. Repentance and faith, which can be understood as easily by the uneducated as by the learned, are the only absolute conditions on which salvation is proffered. With these terms all may comply. And thus the provision of saving mercy in the gospel is rendered as free, as full, and as abundant as the air we breathe, or the water we drink from the provisions of nature; and so this great point of analogy is